On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:25:27AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
On 10 October 2014 09:25, Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
that's the problem with systemd - once it takes over, this "third new offering" will never happen because in order to have even a chance of success it will not only have to do init's job, it will have to do dozens of other unrelated tasks. and it will have to do them *ALL* from the very first version.
I believe systemd has a modular design, you don't have to enable everything.
e.g. if you want to continue using ifupdown or network-manager or anything else, you can continue to do so. You can use systemd without systemd-networkd.
an individual may be able to choose to disable some of systemd's features, but a systemd-replacement can not because it can not know which features (if any) other people choose to disable. at the moment, this problem is less than obvious because we're still in a transition phase - most people are still using other programs for the functions that systemd is taking over. it's a lot easier to switch to software that gradually, through feature-creep, replaces dozens of other programs than it would be to, when systemd is ubiquitous, replace systemd with dozens of other programs all at once. i.e. the transition to systemd is likely to be one-way, impossible or immensely difficult to revert. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>